B.P. Jha, J.

This miscellaneous second appeal arises out of an ORDER :of the appellate court dated 19.6.1968.

2. This matter arises out of an execution case. The suit was dismissed by we trial judge. In appeal the JUDGMENT : of the trial judge was set aside. In second appeal before the High Court the JUDGMENT : of the trial judge was upheld and the JUDGMENT : of the appellate court was set aside. In short the suit was dismissed. I have been informed by the counsel of both the parties that Letters Patent appeal filed by the plaintiff was also withdrawn.

3. On a perusal of the JUDGMENT : of the trial court, it is clear that the plaintiffs brought the suit for a declaration that plot no. 482 is a Bakast laud over which the defendants (tenants) have absolutely no right or title. The plaintiffs had prayed for confirmation of possession and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession. On the basis of these relief’s the plaintiff, brought the suit. In other words, the plaintiff filed the title suit against the defendant, jointly. If the decree would have been passed in favour of the plaintiffs then the decree would have been against 'the